On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 10:52:45AM +0200, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 9:55 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2025 at 07:55:59AM +0200, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 5:27 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 12:14:29PM +0200, Eugenio Pérez wrote: > > > > > @@ -1859,6 +1894,7 @@ static int vduse_create_dev(struct > > > > > vduse_dev_config *config, > > > > > dev->device_features = config->features; > > > > > dev->device_id = config->device_id; > > > > > dev->vendor_id = config->vendor_id; > > > > > + dev->ngroups = (dev->api_version < 1) ? 1 : config->ngroups; > > > > > > > > Is this < 1 same as VDUSE_API_VERSION_1? If so, maybe use that? > > > > > > > > > > The macro for v0 is called VDUSE_API_VERSION, so I think it is less > > > intuitive to put: > > > dev->api_version == VDUSE_API_VERSION > > > > > > But I'm ok with the change if you want. > > > > Confused. You mean "more intuitive"? > > > > Ok think I misread your comment, > > I find > > (dev->api_version < 1) ? ... > > more intuitive than > > (dev->api_version == VDUSE_API_VERSION) ? ... > > But now I think you meant > > (dev->api_version < VDUSE_API_VERSION_1) ? ... > > Is that right?
That's right.
